Actully the 15% with no SS/medicare system is based on the Billy Tauzin's NRST that replaced income taxes but not payroll taxes with a NRST structured like the FairTax legislation.In one paragraph you say it was based on Tauzin's NRST rate and the next you say the rate is lower due to "economic growth potential." Which is it?
Franky your assumption as to how the tax rates were derived for that table is as way off mark as your computations for lack of considering the economic growth potential that goes hand in hand with repeal of income tax systems and moving to broader based taxes with lower marginal rates.
In one paragraph you say it was based on Tauzin's NRST rate and the next you say the rate is lower due to "economic growth potential." Which is it?
Try both, the 15% static estimate of the Tauzin bill establishing the high boundry a rate also held to be reasonable from replacing income tax only situations by many. A tax rate that would substantially lower with economic growth providing a lower boundery with due consideration of dynamic effects would be much more likely.
But then your interests have nothing to do with estabilishing a precise number which is actually irrelevant to your objectives as even the upper boundry of 15% is less than your opinion in any case.